Elite Spec Ritualist for both Necromancer and Revenant

[Sobx.1758]

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@"Sobx.1758" said:

"Your suspicion" being what exactly? :D

That you're more interested in picking an argument than having a discussion. You're looking at people who seem to have similar positions to what you're advocating, and you're finding details to pick fights over.

Ah, so literally what I wrote about you in the previous post, I see.But if you actually read what I initially answered to and what I subsequencially wrote, then that's just not true. On the other hand you "jumped in" to tell me I'm wrong and then proceeded to share a very similar opinion to mine. Just go and re-read it.

To make one last attempt, though: the relevance of the observation comes from context that you might have missed. There is a claim floating around that ritualist themes should be piled exclusively onto the revenant, because revenants are ritualists (this is an oversimplification, but it's the general gist). This is not true: revenants are not ritualists, and in fact, revenants did not even exist in Guild Wars 1. Furthermore, there is precedent for ritualist elements being used by other professions, both in GW2, and in GW1 through secondary professions.

That's great, but then it feels you're not answering to what I said, but to "something some people claim". And "rev not being in gw1" still is not an argument in the slightest, I somehow doubt you don't understand that. Gw2 professions taking on parts of ritualist is also what I wrote, so I'm really not sure what you're trying to argue here.

If you're not taking the perspective that ritualists and revenants are the same thing, then this isn't relevant to you, and I don't see why you'd be making such a big deal about a point that isn't relevant to your position and which you don't seem to understand, unless your motivation is purely to pick a fight. Particularly given the aggressive fashion in which you're pursuing it.

Where did I write anything about rit and rev being the same thing? From my perspective it seems you're the one picking a ""fight"" while claiming I said something I never did just because you think I might share opinion that some people have. I guess you might have just not understand what I wrote.

tl;dr you're arguing about something I never wrote. Why? Who knows, maybe you just misunderstood what you've read.

[draxynnic.3719]

You didn't, but other people have. And then you came into a discussion that as far as I can see you haven't been involved in before, trying to nitpick one specific thing another poster said, said other poster saying that you'd just been attacking them in another thread? And now you're attacking everyone who's engaged with you. Surely you can see how that's suspicious?

I commented on how I think it's unlikely that any one elite specialisation will be called "ritualist" and that ritualist themes will more likely be spread across several as a means of acknowledging that I agreed with your stated position on that point, despite disagreeing with you on the complete non-relevance of another point. It is possible to disagree with somebody in one aspect and agree with them in another. You're the one trying to turn that into a 'gotcha'.

Anyway, I'm done trying to engage with you.

[Burnfall.9573]

@Lily.1935 said:

@"ScottBroChill.3254" said:

No one is denying that they are similar, but it's always been a distinction that ritualist and necromancers are seperate in there schools of thought. They may cross some lines into what they dabble in, but they operate differently and have opposing philosophies. The dancing thing and the whole ritualist casting animations are of course not going to be in gw2 at all because this game is fast based action combat and not a stand still and cast type of game like the first guild wars was, so obviously its not going to be represented in neither revenant nor necromancer. Also, I think it can be safe to say those dancing and whatever the ritualist do were methods for accessing the spirit before magic was introduced to them, so it was probably just something that stuck around and probably make casting magic easier. But, revenant has had no teacher or passing down of teachings. It's a new entity that seems to have tapped into the same energy and magic that ritualist have, albeit using it in a different way. Using a spirits strength build on a ritualist often lacked skills that had any sorta of ritualistic dance animations. And I would argue that that necromancers diverge further from rit/rev when it comes to dealing with spirits and legends. Necromancers could give a kitten less about drawing the powers and spells from spirits, legends, and named characters. They just want to use death magic their own way and not by channeling spirits. Ritualist probably have more in common with Norns than anything else, because they actively communicate with the nature spirits and draw upon their strength for combat. But I wouldn't consider any of that necromancer. Necromancy defiles the dead, it doesnt respect or work with the spirits.

OKay, there is a lot of misinformation here that needs to be cleared up. First off, No, there schools of thought are not separate. Not even remotely. Their methods for achieving the same thing is a bit different but not at all drastically so. AND I can actually prove this with the way the necromancer and the ritualists talk and act in both games. Both have a reverence for the dead but how they do that is a bit different. Ritualists are more focused on the past, what was while Necromancer's are more interested in the manipulation of death. Where they diverge in their undead practices is the level of personal danger each are willing to take onto themselves.

"Necromancers , calling on the spirits of the dead, and even death itself, to overpower enemies and assist allies. In sacrificing Health and taking curses and diseases upon themselves, they can deal large amounts of damage to those foolish enough to oppose them. Dead and dying enemies become unwilling allies in their hands. Necromancers have the singular ability to absorb Energy from an enemy’s death, and can raise a fighting force from the corpses of their foes. Curses, which often cost the Necromancer dearly, exact an even greater toll from enemies, who find that their Enchantments and healing skills are rendered useless. Due to the sacrificial nature of their methods, Necromancers must practice patience and self-discipline to survive."

"Ritualists channel other-worldly energies that summon allies from the void and employ mystic binding rituals that bend those allies to the Ritualist's will. They hood their eyes to better commune with spirits that grant great power and protection to Ritualists and their comrades. The energy they channel drives Ritualist skills which enhance the deadliness of an ally's weapon and wreak havoc on an enemy's health. The Ritualist can also use the remains of the dead to defend the living-not by reanimating corpses as a Necromancer would, but through the ritual use of urns and ashes. Where the Ranger lives as one with the spirit world, the Ritualist can and will be its master."

Those are quote from the manuscript. Necromancer doesn't just "Dabble" in the spirit realm, they're feat first into it. Their methods are two sides of the same coin. The parallels between them is drastic. But we also need to look at how the necromancer's behavior has changed over the past 250 years, which it absolutely has.

"Practitioners of the dark arts, necromancers summon the dead, wield the power of lost souls, and literally suck the life force from the enemy. Necromancers feed on life force, which they can use to bring allies back from the brink or cheat death itself."

You should also look at what the necromancers in the game are saying themselves.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Akesi_Xuni

Follow the link.

"Torches are symbolic. They light the way to the other side. We're necromancers; death follows us wherever we go. We use it, but we also respect it. The torches remind us."

Ritualists also absolutely do not respect the spirits as you said. They seek to control them. The animation of the spirits in GW1 even suggest they are in agony. They writhe and cry and shiver as they're forced to take damage for allies. The Ritualists even use things like "Offering of Spirits which harms themselves if they don't control a spirit. They even use skills to feast on souls because they are not philosophically different from the necromancer. Their methods are slightly different and their limitations are as well. But they are just as cruel, just as sadistic, just as power hungry.

And at the moment, yeah, revenants can only use the abilities of the legends they commune with.

Actually, I used to think this but this isn't actually the case. Revenant's actually DO have their own magic, all be it minor in comparison to the power they receive from the Legends they channel. The revenant uses a new type of magic not seen before them. They can freely rip holes into reality and rupture spacetime. Its not something to overlook. Revenant is basically a walking fractal maker.

The only teachings revenants have recieved were from glint to rytlock. In context of whats going on in the gaming universe, a group of lovecraftian horrors are plagueing the planet and help is needed fast. Possibly glint only had time to teach rytlock the most powerful and essential teachings, and there wasn't time for the nuanced ritualist magic that could take decades to perfect. Using powerful legends and invoking powerful skills that already is probably the best she could have taught at the time. It was what was needed the most. She didn't need to teach him how to summon bloodsong, drop ashes for effects, or any of that, but she taught him how to summon the power of some of the strongest spirits residing in the mists to enhance his physical capabilities. That to me is revenants channeling and binding spirits to themeselves to force these spirits/mist beings to do their bidding. When a revenant uses Rite of the Great Dawrf, it isn't actually casting the spell themeselves but acting as a conduit to have Jalis Ironhammer cast the spell through them. Its honestly the fact that revenant and ritualist are the only two professions who are completely focused on accessing the mists for their powers that make it feel like revenant is more akin to rits than necros.

Most of what you said is just speculation which is why I didn't address it as it doesn't really have any weight in the conversation. its more fan theory than anything which is what I have a problem with when it comes to the revenant. When we're talking about revenant we need to understand some facts. Rytlock never explained exactly how he got the new magic. He actually dodges the question a lot and only later mentions how he got Sohothin back, not how he got the powers themselves. He mentions he learned something from an old friend, which only suggests how he learned to channel Glint specifically, not how to channel the legends in general.

There is a lot of missing information and what I've been saying we we can't make absolute statements like you've been making about the revenant when there isn't absolute information. I don't believe Glint taught him but I can't prove that. From my perspective of what we've seen in the lore is its most likely that he viewed the eternal alchemy, what Scarlet saw in the mists, not that he was actually taught anything. But that's my speculation.

Also, No, Ritualists are not completely focused on the mists. They're focused on the dead. You have to remember as well that the people of Guild wars 1 understood the mists much differently than the people of Guild Wars 2. The ritualist focused on the Underworld and realm of torment and possibly the hall of heroes. The Revenant has no such limitation. The Revenant is more or less hacking the mists. The necromancer is very much focused on the connections of the mists as well, but they're more specialized in the Underworld and realm of torment, much like the Ritualist is. These facts are undeniable.

If you want to speculate on Revenant's limitations to their powers, I'm all for it. I'd love to do that. But I'm not going to humor the idea that the Ritualist = Revenant because the lore, clues, history all does not point to that. But I'm honestly DONE with this conversation. I'm DONE with arguing these points because you guys never bring new evidence I might have missed, its always based on the blindfold and a title. I need a lot more to go on than that. Not wild speculation. I need concrete evidence! Give me a revenant in training in the game trying to scry the mists with bones and I'll tell you you've got something! But as it is, even the Renegade NPC is suggesting she's viewing a fractal, not that its related to the ritualist.

ON another note! Lets talk about the mechanics of my take on it. Because its more fun for me.

+1

'Grenth is the god of death and ice. He is the lord of the Underworld and the patron god of Ritualists, Necromancers, and Hydromancers'

https://guildwiki.gamepedia.com/Grenth

• 'Came then Desmina, scorned and exiled by her people. And in her misery and wretchedness, did Desmina curse the gods for abandoning all who, like her, admired power and ambition.

• And asketh she, "Where is the god to whom I may give my undying devotion? Where is the God to whom I may beg revenge against those who scorn me?"

• And rumbled then the earth from far below, and with a terrible groan, split open. The ground grew white with frost and ice, and from forth the frozen earth spilled the rotted, skeletal minions of Grenth.

• Appeared then the god, and with bony hands outstretched, welcomed the girl into His fold. Saith he, "I am your god. Follow where I lead, come whence I call, and the rotted corpses of the dead will be yours to control." And swearing allegiance in life and beyond, did Desmina thence become the god's first follower.'

-- Scriptures of Grenth: 48 BE

'Grenth is the darkest of the Gods, and depicts his dark image with great efficiency. Although his body is that of a human, he bears the skull of a fallen beast. Grenth is often seen with minions crawling for his acceptance, for his followers are usually fanatic in his teachings.'

[Elric.4713]

@ScottBroChill.3254 Unless you offer affirmation on her believes it's pointless.I'd also like to argue that Ritualist spirits are Mist creatures by the looks of them, and not spirits of dead humans.

[Sobx.1758]

@"draxynnic.3719" said:You didn't, but other people have.

Not in the post I was answering to and not in the sentence I was quoting. The fact that "other people have" is as irrelevant as revenant not being in gw1.

And then you came into a discussion that as far as I can see you haven't been involved in before

Am I supposed to be involved in the first 3-5 posts of the thread to be able to participate at any point after that or what exactly are you trying to say here?

And now you're attacking everyone who's engaged with you. Surely you can see how that's suspicious?

I'm not attacking anyone, if you think disagreeing with someone is equivalent to insulting or attacking them, then it's your problem.And I wasn't "attacking him in other thread", not sure what you're talking about right now.

I commented on how I think it's unlikely that any one elite specialisation will be called "ritualist" and that ritualist themes will more likely be spread across several as a means of acknowledging that I agreed with your stated position on that point, despite disagreeing with you on the complete non-relevance of another point. It is possible to disagree with somebody in one aspect and agree with them in another. You're the one trying to turn that into a 'gotcha'.

Nope, I'm not turning anything into 'gotcha'. But you didn't -and apparently still don't- understand what I disagreed with, because if you did, you'd understand that disagreeing on the previous point makes agreeing on the next one illogical.

Anyway, I'm done trying to engage with you.

"Engage" might be the correct word here, because all you did was try to claim I said something I didn't, apparently in an attempt to disagree with me despite sharing a similar opinion.You do you.

[InsaneQR.7412]

Personally i am down for both being ritualistic in style.

But I would want sword MH for necro and go more into the blood rite direction.

For rev I absolutely refuse another weapon choice than greatsword.I would love razzah as a class mechanic (not the legend).And glyphs as new skills (instead of a new legend).When channeling razzah your weapon skills change depending on your currently channeled base legend.So ventari gets ranged CC, cleanses, blinds and heals.Shiro some ranged DPS.Jalis melee DPS and CC.And malyx gets mobility and ranged condi DPS.

Basically enhancing their abilities.Greatsword as an AoE heavy mid range weapon would be great.

[Thornwolf.9721]

1. Ritualists and necromancer share the same god, grenth and as shown above they have a very similar aesthetic to the necromancer.
2. Messmers share the same god as assassins, this is just something that will be tied to them and will lead to them being one in the same just as the necromancer/rit.

Also I want to bring up and bring to your attention, paragons are spellbreakers. Spellbreakers were given to the warriors as the E-specs as they had shouts and stances, and as it stood were the closest in terms of theme to the paragon. So we will never see the paragon because it exists as an E-spec of differing name to the Warrior who shared themes, and commonality with the the paragon. (Paragon in guild wars 1 always felt like a ranged warrior, same gold aesthetic and same shouts/stances.) This introduced mediation's to the warrior and gave them full counter.

Given how these two shared a theme and were brought together, and the dervish was left out (Probably because the ONLY class it could of fit on was rev. And how it woulda been weird to implement it given how the gods have been.) Its safe to assume that one of the two professions will be introduced as a spec, and in all honestly I don't think it will be ritualist. I believe assassin will be added to messmer and ritualist will be left as an ambient being, something like the dervish within PoF where they exist but we can't be one. I think Kalla will be as close to a spirit spammer as we get, and necromancer will get something to do with plague and perhaps some form of jade/echovald forest shenanigans. Could also maybe have something tied to the Oni? I don't know.

I feel like Ritualist will be left to the history books; Because I just see them looking at it and being like. "Well kalla has spirits, and is the kinda thing people think of. So she will be the homage to the ritualist." Just because it existed in guild wars prior, does not mean we will get to play as it and it seems highly likely given how the engineer is its spiritual successor I REALLY doubt they will bring it to the fold. As much as I miss it and my dervish... I just don't see them ever existing in current time.

[draxynnic.3719]

@"Thornwolf.9721" said:Also I want to bring up and bring to your attention, paragons are spellbreakers. Spellbreakers were given to the warriors as the E-specs as they had shouts and stances, and as it stood were the closest in terms of theme to the paragon. So we will never see the paragon because it exists as an E-spec of differing name to the Warrior who shared themes, and commonality with the the paragon. (Paragon in guild wars 1 always felt like a ranged warrior, same gold aesthetic and same shouts/stances.) This introduced mediation's to the warrior and gave them full counter.

This is something I strenuously disagree with.

Yes, there is a thematic link with the daggers being symbolically formed from the heads of broken spears, but there is nothing in the antimagic focus of the spellbreaker that comes from paragon - it's a completely different fighting style. Based on skill names, it seems to draw mostly from the anti-magic and interrupt-oriented side of the dervish, albeit replacing the scythe with weapons carrying different symbolism. Even some of the names that are off still seem similar to some dervish skills - for instance, compare and contrast Full Counter with Shield of Force.

Remember that we do see actual Paragons in season 4, they're just not playable. Weapon choice aside, they're probably closest to guardians in behaviour.

[Lily.1935]

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@"Thornwolf.9721" said:Also I want to bring up and bring to your attention, paragons are spellbreakers. Spellbreakers were given to the warriors as the E-specs as they had shouts and stances, and as it stood were the closest in terms of theme to the paragon. So we will never see the paragon because it exists as an E-spec of differing name to the Warrior who shared themes, and commonality with the the paragon. (Paragon in guild wars 1 always felt like a ranged warrior, same gold aesthetic and same shouts/stances.) This introduced mediation's to the warrior and gave them full counter.

This is something I strenuously disagree with.

Yes, there is a thematic link with the daggers being symbolically formed from the heads of broken spears, but there is nothing in the antimagic focus of the spellbreaker that comes from paragon - it's a completely different fighting style. Based on skill names, it seems to draw mostly from the anti-magic and interrupt-oriented side of the dervish, albeit replacing the scythe with weapons carrying different symbolism. Even some of the names that are off still seem similar to some dervish skills - for instance, compare and contrast Full Counter with

Shield of Force

.

Remember that we do see actual Paragons in season 4, they're just not

playable.

Weapon choice aside, they're probably closest to guardians in behaviour.

Could you show me the paragons? I must have missed them. I saw Dervish, but not paragon... And I was jelly.

[draxynnic.3719]

@Lily.1935 said:

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@"Thornwolf.9721" said:Also I want to bring up and bring to your attention, paragons are spellbreakers. Spellbreakers were given to the warriors as the E-specs as they had shouts and stances, and as it stood were the closest in terms of theme to the paragon. So we will never see the paragon because it exists as an E-spec of differing name to the Warrior who shared themes, and commonality with the the paragon. (Paragon in guild wars 1 always felt like a ranged warrior, same gold aesthetic and same shouts/stances.) This introduced mediation's to the warrior and gave them full counter.

This is something I strenuously disagree with.

Yes, there is a thematic link with the daggers being symbolically formed from the heads of broken spears, but there is nothing in the antimagic focus of the spellbreaker that comes from paragon - it's a completely different fighting style. Based on skill names, it seems to draw mostly from the anti-magic and interrupt-oriented side of the dervish, albeit replacing the scythe with weapons carrying different symbolism. Even some of the names that are off still seem similar to some dervish skills - for instance, compare and contrast Full Counter with

Shield of Force

.

Remember that we do see actual Paragons in season 4, they're just not

playable.

Weapon choice aside, they're probably closest to guardians in behaviour.

Could you show me the paragons? I must have missed them. I saw Dervish, but not paragon... And I was jelly.

There are Loyalist Paragons as enemies in Istan at least, and Sunspear Paragons both as general NPCs and summonable as an ally through a consumable. Spearmarshal Zaeim is also clearly a Paragon.

Sunspear Paragons seem to use Anthem of Flame (functionally very similar to the Justice active or Ashes of the Just on firebrand) and Song of Power (grants quickness and vigor - I don't think there's a direct equivalent, but granting quickness is often a guardian thing). Loyalist Paragons trade Song of Power for Song of Restoration, which provides regeneration and a heal (so similar to popping a traited Resolve active).

[Lily.1935]

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@Lily.1935 said:

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@"Thornwolf.9721" said:Also I want to bring up and bring to your attention, paragons are spellbreakers. Spellbreakers were given to the warriors as the E-specs as they had shouts and stances, and as it stood were the closest in terms of theme to the paragon. So we will never see the paragon because it exists as an E-spec of differing name to the Warrior who shared themes, and commonality with the the paragon. (Paragon in guild wars 1 always felt like a ranged warrior, same gold aesthetic and same shouts/stances.) This introduced mediation's to the warrior and gave them full counter.

This is something I strenuously disagree with.

Yes, there is a thematic link with the daggers being symbolically formed from the heads of broken spears, but there is nothing in the antimagic focus of the spellbreaker that comes from paragon - it's a completely different fighting style. Based on skill names, it seems to draw mostly from the anti-magic and interrupt-oriented side of the dervish, albeit replacing the scythe with weapons carrying different symbolism. Even some of the names that are off still seem similar to some dervish skills - for instance, compare and contrast Full Counter with

Shield of Force

.

Remember that we do see actual Paragons in season 4, they're just not

playable.

Weapon choice aside, they're probably closest to guardians in behaviour.

Could you show me the paragons? I must have missed them. I saw Dervish, but not paragon... And I was jelly.

There are Loyalist Paragons as enemies in Istan at least, and Sunspear Paragons both as general NPCs and summonable as an ally through a consumable. Spearmarshal Zaeim is also clearly a Paragon.

Sunspear Paragons seem to use Anthem of Flame (functionally very similar to the Justice active or Ashes of the Just on firebrand) and Song of Power (grants quickness and vigor - I don't think there's a direct equivalent, but granting quickness is often a guardian thing). Loyalist Paragons trade Song of Power for Song of Restoration, which provides regeneration and a heal (so similar to popping a traited Resolve active).

Mind linking it? I don't recall. Not that I don't believe you, I do. I would just like to see it.

[draxynnic.3719]

@Lily.1935 said:

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@Lily.1935 said:

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@"Thornwolf.9721" said:Also I want to bring up and bring to your attention, paragons are spellbreakers. Spellbreakers were given to the warriors as the E-specs as they had shouts and stances, and as it stood were the closest in terms of theme to the paragon. So we will never see the paragon because it exists as an E-spec of differing name to the Warrior who shared themes, and commonality with the the paragon. (Paragon in guild wars 1 always felt like a ranged warrior, same gold aesthetic and same shouts/stances.) This introduced mediation's to the warrior and gave them full counter.

This is something I strenuously disagree with.

Yes, there is a thematic link with the daggers being symbolically formed from the heads of broken spears, but there is nothing in the antimagic focus of the spellbreaker that comes from paragon - it's a completely different fighting style. Based on skill names, it seems to draw mostly from the anti-magic and interrupt-oriented side of the dervish, albeit replacing the scythe with weapons carrying different symbolism. Even some of the names that are off still seem similar to some dervish skills - for instance, compare and contrast Full Counter with

Shield of Force

.

Remember that we do see actual Paragons in season 4, they're just not

playable.

Weapon choice aside, they're probably closest to guardians in behaviour.

Could you show me the paragons? I must have missed them. I saw Dervish, but not paragon... And I was jelly.

There are Loyalist Paragons as enemies in Istan at least, and Sunspear Paragons both as general NPCs and summonable as an ally through a consumable. Spearmarshal Zaeim is also clearly a Paragon.

Sunspear Paragons seem to use Anthem of Flame (functionally very similar to the Justice active or Ashes of the Just on firebrand) and Song of Power (grants quickness and vigor - I don't think there's a direct equivalent, but granting quickness is often a guardian thing). Loyalist Paragons trade Song of Power for Song of Restoration, which provides regeneration and a heal (so similar to popping a traited Resolve active).

Mind linking it? I don't recall. Not that I don't believe you, I do. I would just like to see it.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Loyalist_Paragon

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Sunspear_Paragon

[Lily.1935]

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@Lily.1935 said:

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@Lily.1935 said:

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@"Thornwolf.9721" said:Also I want to bring up and bring to your attention, paragons are spellbreakers. Spellbreakers were given to the warriors as the E-specs as they had shouts and stances, and as it stood were the closest in terms of theme to the paragon. So we will never see the paragon because it exists as an E-spec of differing name to the Warrior who shared themes, and commonality with the the paragon. (Paragon in guild wars 1 always felt like a ranged warrior, same gold aesthetic and same shouts/stances.) This introduced mediation's to the warrior and gave them full counter.

This is something I strenuously disagree with.

Yes, there is a thematic link with the daggers being symbolically formed from the heads of broken spears, but there is nothing in the antimagic focus of the spellbreaker that comes from paragon - it's a completely different fighting style. Based on skill names, it seems to draw mostly from the anti-magic and interrupt-oriented side of the dervish, albeit replacing the scythe with weapons carrying different symbolism. Even some of the names that are off still seem similar to some dervish skills - for instance, compare and contrast Full Counter with

Shield of Force

.

Remember that we do see actual Paragons in season 4, they're just not

playable.

Weapon choice aside, they're probably closest to guardians in behaviour.

Could you show me the paragons? I must have missed them. I saw Dervish, but not paragon... And I was jelly.

There are Loyalist Paragons as enemies in Istan at least, and Sunspear Paragons both as general NPCs and summonable as an ally through a consumable. Spearmarshal Zaeim is also clearly a Paragon.

Sunspear Paragons seem to use Anthem of Flame (functionally very similar to the Justice active or Ashes of the Just on firebrand) and Song of Power (grants quickness and vigor - I don't think there's a direct equivalent, but granting quickness is often a guardian thing). Loyalist Paragons trade Song of Power for Song of Restoration, which provides regeneration and a heal (so similar to popping a traited Resolve active).

Mind linking it? I don't recall. Not that I don't believe you, I do. I would just like to see it.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Loyalist_Paragon

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Sunspear_Paragon

Thanks.